ML20137H256
| ML20137H256 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 11/22/1978 |
| From: | James Smith TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17198A292 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-85-59 QI-QP-11.0-11, NUDOCS 8512020351 | |
| Download: ML20137H256 (9) | |
Text
.
(
(
, TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING CO.
IN Im E
REVISION PAGE CPSES 01-QP-11.0-11 0
11-22-78 1 of 8 PREPARED BY: b [
INSPECTION OF COLD WEATHER y
~
8
//- t #2-7B Date CONCRETE OPERATIONS
- dd%e APPROVE Date (g'f
1.0 REFERENCES
il 1-A Specification 2323-55-9, " Concrete" 1-B ACI-306, " Recommended Practice For Cold Weather Concreting" 2.0 GENERAL 1hipom,U1M,0H IM D
2.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE R
iN 3
To outline the inspection requirements for cold weather concrete operations and comply with the requirements of Reference 1-A.
2.2 DEFINITION AND DE' TERMINATION 2.2.1 Cold WeatherifergiptTE kil,fromthetimeof As defined i I
'W the first fr unfil the mean daily temperature falls below ~
400F for more than 1 day in a row...".
2.2.2 Determination The determination that cold weather concreting principles are applicable will be made by the Civil Inspection Supervisor /
Designee.
3.0 INSTRUCTION 3.1 PREPLACEMENT INSPECTION ACTIVITIES 3.1.1 Protective Measures The QC Inspector shall verify:
y~
8512020351 851106 GbDE 9
PDR i
TUGCO QA
f.
(
y.
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING CO REVISION 3l E PAGE f3 CPSESP Ql-QP-11.0-11 0
11-22-78 2 of 8 That arrangements for covering, insulation, heating or a.
housing the placement are made in advance.
b.
That the protective measures selected will be adequate to maintain the temperature and moisture content in all parts of the placement.
c.
That adequate fire protection equipment is on hand and fire prevention measures are enforced.
3.1.2 Curing Consideration Before Placement The QC Inspector shall verify that arrangements are made before placement to maintain the fresh concre'e in a moist condition at t
the required temperatures throughout the curing period.
3.1.3 Inspection Of Placement Area The QC Inspector shall verify:
,g a.
That there is no ice, snow or frost on the construction Q
joint, rebar, forms or any surface in the placement area that will come into contact with fr,esh concrete.
b.
That the temperature of all surfaces in the placement area to be in contact with fresh concrete has been raised to a mini-mum of 400 F.
3.2 BATCHING AND PLACEMENT 3.2.1 Control Of Materials The QC Inspector shall verify the following:
a.
Aggregate used in the batching of concrete is free of ice and frozen lumps.
b.
Aggregate not heated above 150 F.
0 If either water or aggregate heated above 1000F, both shall c.
come together first in the mixer so that the high temperature of one or the other is reduced before cement is added, d.
Cement is not added to mixtures of aggregate and water that exceed 1000F.
(U -
/7 u
I
=-
TUCCO Q.i..
y
(
(.:
I E
TEXAS UTILITIES GEf!ERATING CO.
REVISIC.'i PAGE
^
(-
QI-QP-11.0-11 0
11-22-78 3 of 8 3.2.2 Placement Temperature The QC Inspector shall verify that concrete is not placed at a a temperature lower than:
Sections Less Than 2'-6" Sections Greater Than 2'-6" 550F 50 F 0
3.3 CURING 3.3.1 Moisture Preservation For Surfaco:: Not In Contact With Forms The QC Inspector shall verify that one of the following methods for moisture preservation is implemented immediately following placement and continued throughout the duration of curing:
a.
Ponding or continuous sprinkling.
b.
Absorbent mats or fabric kept continuously wet.
c.
Sand kept continuously wet.
d.
Steam not exceeding 1500F or mist spray, not to be used on sections greater than 2'-6".
e.
Application of waterproof sheet material. Must be in full contact with concrete surfaces and free of rips, tears or holes.
Material must conform to ASTM C171.
f.
Curing compound applied imediately after any water sheens have disappeared from concrete' surface. Cannot be used on construction joints without specific approval of the Engineer.
3.3.2 Moisture Preservation For Surfaces In Contact With Forms a.
For surfaces in contact with metal or coated wood forms, no moisture addition or retention methods are required.
b.
If forms are removed during the curing period, the QC In-pector shall verify that one of the methods in Paragraph 3.3.1 is employed.
(O '
I mcco n.s -
. ~ -
7 r
i I"
. TEXAS UTILITIES GEf!EP TING CO.
REVIS IO.'
E ER PAGE
- CPSES, M
01-0P-11.0-11 0
11-22-78 4 of 8 s
c.
The QC Inspector shall verify that concrete surfaces are maintained in a moist condition during form removal.
3.3.3 Changes In Curing Methods Any curing method described in Paragraph 3.1.1 when used initially may be replaced by any one of the other methods at any time the
. concrete is 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> old, provided the concrete is not permitted to become surface dry during the transition.
3.3.4 Concrete Surface Temperature Requirements The concrete surface temperature shall be maintained between a.
500F and 700F throughout the curir.g period, except b.
On the containment extgrior wall the surface temperature must be maintained above 40 F for a minimum of 7 days after placing, and maintained above freezing for the remainder of the 14 day curing period.
3.3.5 Reouirements Of Air Temperature Adjacent To The Concrete
(
)
For sections 2'-6" thick or less, the temperature of the a.
s air adjacent to the concrete, during and immediately follow-ing the curirig period, shall be held constant if possible, and shall not exceed a change of 50F in any one hour or 50of in any 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> period.
b.
For foundation mats in excess of 2'-6" and the containment exterior wall, the temperature of the air adjacent to the concrete, during and immediately following the curing period, shall be held constant if possible, and shall not exceed a change of 30F in any one hour'or 300F in any 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> period.
3.3.6 0C Inspection For Maintenance Of Temperature Requirements To assure maintenance of temperature requirements, the QC In-spector shall verify that:
Prior arrangements in Paragraph 3.1.2 are fully implecented.
a.
I l
I 6O Q
I I
TUCCO QA ---
o
\\
IN ON TEXAS lKILITIES GENERATING CO.
REVISION E
PAGE CPSES-M 01-QP-11.0-11 0
11-22-78 5 of 8 i
s b.
Edges and corners of placements which are vulnerable to freez-ing are fully protected.
c.
Combustion heaters emitting exhaust gases which contain carbon dioxide are not used during the first 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> of curing unless the concrete surface is protected from exposure to the gases.
d.
Surface temperatures are taken at several points on the place-ment to represent highest and lowest temperatures.
e.
Heaters are not positioned in a manner that will cause excess heat at localized points on the placement.
f.
At the end of the curing period, concrete in a saturated con-dition is not exposed to freezing temperatures, g.
At the end of the curing period, the drop in temperature through-out the first 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> period does not exceed 500F for concrete sections 2'-6" or less and 300F for sections greater than 2'-6".
h.
If at any time dur'ing the curing period concrete temperatures are allowed to drop below minimum requirements, the curing is ex-m
{}
tended for the length of time that the temperature was allowed to remain below the minimum requirements.
3.3.7 Duration of Curing a.
Containment exterior walls and foundation mats in excess of 2'-6" shall be cured in a manner which will contain moisture in the concrete f 5 4 days. surface temperature must be main-tained above 40 F for 7 days and freezing for the remaining 14 days.
b.
All concrete placements shall be cured for a minimum of 7 days and the method employed shall maintain moisture within the concrete for that period of time.
3.4 PROTECTION FROM MECHANICAL INJURY I
The QC Inspector shall verify that during the curing period, the l
concrete is protected from and is not subjected to damaging mechan-ical disturbances, such as load stresses, heavy shock, and excessive vibration. He shall also verify that all finished concrete surfaces are protected and do not receive damage from construction equipment, materials or methods, by application of curing procedures, and by rain or running water.
I h9 i
LJ TUCCO DA -
t
<>=.
r t'
(,
s-I 7EXAS UTILITIES GENERATING CO.
REVISION E
PAGE CPSES-QI-QP-11.0-11 0
11-22-78 6 of 8 3.5 FIELD CURED CYLINDERS The QC Inspector shall verify that field cured cylinders are placed in or on the structure as near to the point of use as practicable, the same protection from the elements on all sur-faces as is given to the placement they represent.
3.6 DOCUMENTATION 3.6.1 Verification of Daily Inspection Activities a.
The QC Inspector shall verify daily cold weather concrete inspection activities by initialing and dating the Daily Curing Verification Report (Figure 1).
b.
At the end of the required curing period, the QC Inspector shall sign the Daily Curing Verification Report and submit it to the QC Documentation Supervisor.
3.6.2 Monitor Of Concrete Surface-Temperature During Cold Weather curing n) i The QC Inspector shall monitor concrete surface temperatures a.
of each placement in cure as frequently as possible during his shift, using a surface type dfal thermometer insulated
~
from the surrounding air.
b.
The minimum frequency for monitoring concrete surface temp-eratures will be at least once each half of the QC Inspectors shift for each placement in cure. This frequency will bd increased at the direction of the Civil QC Supervisor / Designee when abrupt weather changes o,ccur. However, the QC Inspector should use his own judgement to monitor the surface temperature of fresh concrete as often as necessary to protect it from freezing when severe conditions threaten without waiting for additional instructions, The QC Inspector shall record the day, date, ambient temperature c.
from the site recording thermometer, weather conditions and con-crete surface temperatures on the Curing Report Pour Temperature l
Record (Figure 2),
d.
At the end of the required curing period, the QC Inspector shall submit completed Figure 2 to the QC Documentation Supervisor.
Tucco QA -
i
v,
~
~
(
(
s.
INS E CTION TEXAS t!T!LITIES GENERATING CO, REVISIO::
ISSUE PAGC MlNBER DATE em.
CPSE9 f
QI-QP-11.0-11 0
11-22-78 7 of 8 Figure 1 Page _ of i
CAflY CL*RIMC VERIFICATf 04 Pour Nes Structures Four Deter Flecement Temp. Range Type of Cures Ties of Fors Removals Thermometer Nos EXTDCED C31NC
([
WEN APPLICA3LE
\\
DAT 1
2 l3 4
4 l7 8
9 10 12 1) 16 151TIA:.s DATZ Note: Whee curing compound to used, check integrity of application by vettieg surface with unter. If the vetor forme droplete or boede, the curtas film te adequate.
' C m te o <-
e.C. I.e,.u.r A(U t
i Tucco tp
G O
D
,c pao.ecr. caea
_sg u e. A h9s m
5
~
CUBNG R{POR7* POUR TEMPERATilRE RECO_B_O s n.-. a _
p o a i
m m m
,j' mspensruxe nunc or mecx cacarre wmt; mcwsvr RJUR NO w
a maisvr reues cacaere susfcc resiscesruse nous uouragen-9
,arare n
ll.
w are g
j,
,g, pg, pgg,,g33 ec,y,,
yo,
,f,g,37,gg7,g g,p,g,1,,,g,,7,g jg;g i
o il 5
4 m
O A 5" m#
7 sN N
E
- 94 fD e
e-o
?
9 o
~
g C
g o
g g
C h
BB gm
~a Si m
e 4
i
,j O
7 R
m i
l i
\\
r* o '
b7
~
ISSUE PROCEDURE REVISION PAGE TJ.XAS UTILITIES GENERATING CO.
typprq DATE CPSES
/T CP-QP-0.2 6
11/27/78 1 of 1 A,/
l s
CIVIL INSPECTION MANUAL TABLE OF CONTENTS QUALITY DOCUMENT NUMBER TITLE REVISION A
Civil Inspection Activities - Introduction 0
CP-QP-11.0 Civil Inspection Activities O
CP-QP-15.0 Tagging System 0
CP-QP-16.0 Nonconformances and Deficiencies O
CP-QP-18.0 Inspection Report 0
QI-QP-2.1-1 Qualification of Concrete Inspection and Test 0
Personnel QI-QP-11.0-1 Cadweld Inspection 1
s QI-QP-11.0-2 Reinforcing Steel, Miscellaneous Steel and Embedded 1
Item Placement QI-QP-11.0-3 Concrete Placement Inspection 0
QI-QP-11.0-4 Summer Concrete Curing Inspection 1
QI-QP-11.0-5 Inspection of Concrete Repair 1
QI-QP-11.0-6 Grouting Inspection 0
QI-QP-11.0-7 Structural Steel Erection and Bolted Connection 1
Inspection QI-QP-11.0-8 Concrete Production Inspection 0
QI-QP-II.0-9 Soil Backfill Inspection 0
QI-QP-11.0-10 Shotcrete Application Inspection 0
QI-QP-11.0-11 INSPECTION OF COLD WEATHER CONCRETE O
OPERATIONS b
TUCCO QA
h;9 5
e/f(
O az -7 42 Docket: 50-445/82-11 3Q h[
b Texas Utilities Generating Company ATTN: Mr. R. J. Gary, Executive Vic President and General Managt 2001 Bryan Tower gjddf-f Dallas, Texas 75201 jg Gentlemen:
This refers to the inspection conducted by our Senior Resident Inspector, Mr. R. G. Taylor, during the period June 1982, of activities authorized by NRC Construction Pemit CPPR-126 for Comanche Peak, Unit 1, and to the discussion of our findings with Mr. R. G. Tolson and other members of your staff during the inspection.
Areas examined during the inspection and our findings are documented in the enclosed inspection report. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examination of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and observations by the inspector.
(3 V
During this inspection, it was found that certain of your activities were in violation with NRC requirements. Consequently, you are required to respond to this. violation, in writing, in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.201 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2 Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations. Your response should be based on the specifics contained in the Notice of Violation enclosed with this letter. Details of this item will be included in an inspection report to be issued in the near future and identified as NRC Inspection Report 50-445/82-11.
In acccedance with 10 CFR 2.790(a), a copy of this letter and the enclosures will be placed in the NRC Public Doctment Room unless you notify this office, by telephone, within 10 days of the date of this letter and submit a written application to withhold infomation contained therein within 30 days of the date of this letter. Such application must be consistent with the requirements of 2.790(b)(1).
The response directed by this letter and the accompanying Notice is not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget
,3 as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511.
s r
~
/
b n,,2 n > / a c 32u f
i i
. f.h.b k
I.
....?.k.S.
. E.RY-
... NN -
0 "'"
~'d>!.Ifay1.onsa.Ves rn$....
... Mad sen......
.JGagEia.rdo.
..JQ9hns,on 1 g.9).pnt-
.....? l82...
...l.l.0 l82........?.I.N.l82.........l!..hl. 2...%.}l5l,02. f;$-[h ll
. /
/
(~4 Texas Utilities Generating Company,d Should you have any questions conceming this inspection, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.
6 Sincerely, 18hrjginst L :.rd by,3 R,3,,CRCssMAti'*
-G. L. Madsen, Chief Reactor Project Branch 1 k - Notice of Violation A
cc w/ enclosure:
Texas Utilities Generating Company ATTM: Mr. H. C. Schmidt, Project Manager 2001 Bryan Tower-Dallas, Texas 75201 O
bec to DMB (IE01):
bec distib. by RIV:
BC D. Kelley, RRI PM R. Taylor, RRI AE00
- 1. F. Westeman ELD Info Systems i
IE File RPB2 IE/DRRI/RPRIB TPB NRR/DHFS
-J. T. Collins NRR/0LB/RAB C. Wisner, PA0 NRR/0LB/RAB Texas State Dept. Health RES Juanita Ellis LPDR David Preister PDR:HQ Richard Fouke NSIC RIV File n
NTIS M
O O
O rt'C E )
........l.....
- ""'q..................
.. p
.. 2...___
.b 1
a APPENDIX A Of Notice of Violation Texas Utilities Generating Company Docket: 50-445/82-11 Comanche Peak, Unit 1 CPPR-126 Based on the results of an NRC inspection conducted during June 1982,'and in accordance with the NRC Enforcement Policy (10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C),
47 FR 9987, dated March 9,1982, the following violation was identified.
Failure to Perform Inspections of Installation Activities Related to Unit 1 Containment Polar Crane.
Criterion X of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 requires that inspections of activities affecting quality shall be established and executed by or for the organizations performing the activity to verify conformance with the documented instructions, procedures, and dr aings for accomplishing the activity.
Texas Utilities Generating Company Quality Assuranca Plan, or the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, in Sectan 10.0, states " Examinations, tests, and inspections are performed at specific stages in the manufacturing, fabrication and installation activites to ensure that the items meet the applicable specification, code and regulatory requirements."
Contrary to the above:
The Senior Resident Inspector (Construction) has determined through interviews with craft labor supervision and the Comanche Peak Project Engineer for Civil / Structural activities that no inspections of the fabrication or installation of certain shims specificed by Design Change Authorization 9872, dated March 30, 1981, and drawing SK-82032, revision 0, were performed.
The shims specified by the Design Change Authorization and the drawing referenced above form a portion of the seismic restraint system for the containment polar crane.
This is a Severity Level IV Violation (Supplement II.0)
Pursuant to the Provisions of 10 CFR, Part 2.201, Texas Utilites Generating l
Company, is hereby required to submit to this office, within 30 days of the date of this Notice, a written statement or explanation in reply, including:
(1) the corrective steps which have been taken and the results achieved; (2) corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations; and (3) the date when full compliance will be achieved.
Consideration may be given to extending your response time for good cause shown.
,O\\
V Date July 7. 1982 l!)O%
m
I e
t TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING CO.TIPANY 2001 DRYAN 'N)WER
- h;((h,-lr September 23, 1982 TXX-3573
~
Mr. G. L. Madsen, Chief Reactor Project Branch 1 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
.0ffice of Inspection and Enforcement 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Docket No. 50-445 Arlington, TX 76012
' COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION RESPONSE TO NRC LETTER DATED AUGUST 28, 1982 NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO 82-11 NO. 10130 j
Dear Mr. Madsen:
This supplements our letter of August 2, 1982, logged TXX-3554 and provides the additional informa, tion requested in your letter of August 26 relative to the Notice of Violation transmitted as part of your Inspection No. 82-11.
O Our previous response specif.ically addressed the lack of a Quality Control (QC) installation interface regarding the inspection activities.cf the polar crane shims. Other activities which were the iesponsibility of the Rigging Department were required to be performed in accordance with construction procedure CCP-22 which included a QC interface or in accordance with travelers reviewed by Quality Engineering (QE). This includes installation of miscel-laneous structural steel, installation of pipe whip and moment restraints, and installation of the residual heat.and containment spray heat exchanger supports.
In addition, all rigging activities since August,1978, were accomplished in accordance with travelers approved by QE, including the setting of the reactor vessel, steam generators, Risidual Heat Removal (RHR) heat exchanger, contain-ment spray heat exchangers, safety injection pumps, RHR pumps, containment
-spray pumps, and most electrical equipment.
We have concluded that in all but the original citation, an adequate interface was maintained between the Rigging Department and QA as programatically required.
If you have any further questions, please advise.
Very truly yours.
R.
. Gary RJG:eaq D v If M U ),f
=
/...
N In Reply Refer To:
MAY 13 ;gg3 O
Dockets:
50-445/83-03 C1 50-446/83-01 Texas Utilities Generating Company ATTN:
R. J. Gary, Executive Vice President & General Manager 2001 Bryan Tower Dallas, Texas 75201 Gentlemen:
Thank you for your letter of April 25, 1983, in response to our letter and Notice of Violation dated March 28, 1983.
We have reviewed your reply and find it responsive to the concerns raised in our Notice of Violation.' We will review the implementation of your corrective actions during a future inspection to determine that full compliance has been achieved and will be maintained.
Sincerely, "Ortsinal Sisned tm a,r MAostw G. L. Madsen, Chief Reactor Project Branch 1 cc:
Texas Utilities Generating Company ATTN:
H. C. Schmidt, Project Manager 2001 Bryan Tower Dallas, Texas 75201 Th bec to DMB (IE01) bec distrib. by RIV:
d D. Kelley, SRI-Ops i
R. Taylor, SRI-Cons j
Section Chief (RPS-A) i E. Johnson RIV File TX STATE DEPT. HEALTH RPS-A k RPB1 DRRP&EP e
TWesterman/dsm GMadsen JGa tardo 5/)/83 5/jg/83 5// /83 f
1 t{1'p
\\l L'
% g C., + r s
- <. v -
l e
e r-g e
.mq
,e-y ay
.s.y TENAS UTILITIES GENERATING CO.TIPANY
- N 81 HRL\\N "IUM EH D ALL s%. TC.\\ W 73.M83 * *N' R
@@ LEON I
T II
'\\ APR 2 71983
, a '. '
-.I y
-.. N April 25, 1983 TXX-3658 Mr. G. L. Madsen, Chief
~
Reactor Project Branch 1 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Inspection and Enforcement 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Docket Nos.:
50-445 Arlington, Texas 76012 50-446 COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION RESPONSE TO NRC NOTICE OF VIOLATION INSPECTION REPORT N0. 83-03/01 FILE NO.:
10130
Dear Mr. Madsen:
We have reviewed your letter dated March 28,'1983 on the inspection conducted by your Senior Resident Reactor Inspector, Mr. R. G. Taylor, of activities authorized by NRC Construction Permits CPPR-126 and CPPR-127 for Comanche Peak, Units 1 a.nd 2.
We have resporded to the finding listed in Appendix A of that letter.
To aid in the understanding of our response, we have repeated the requirement and your finding followed by our corrective action. We feel th.! enclosed information to be responsive to the Inspector's finding.
If you have any questions, please advise.
Very truly yours, RJG:aq Enclosures cc:
NRC Region IV - (0 + 1 copy)
(~]
V Director, Inspection & Enforcement (15 copies) l U. S.Noclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 j $^ $ 2 COQ /g
. r,
4
?
L NRC Inspection Report 82-11 TXX-3554 O Page 2 APPENDIX A Notice of Violation Texas Utilities Generating Company Docket:
50-445/82-11 l
Comanche Peak, Unit 1 CPPR-126 I
J i
j Based on the results_of an NRC inspection conducted during June 1982, a'nd in i
accordance with the NRC Enforcement Policy (10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C).
J 47 FR 9987, dated March 9,1982, the following violation was identified.
j i
Failure to Perform Inspections of Installation Activities Related to I
i Unit 1 Containment Polar Crane.
s f
Criterion X of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 requires that inspections l!
of activities affecting quality shall be established and executed by i
1 or for the organizations performing the activity to verify conformance i
with the documented instructions, procedures, and drawings for i
accomplishing the activity.
l Texas Utilities Generating Company Quality Assurance Plan, or (sic) the
~
Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, in Section 10.0, states
" Examinations, tests, and inspections are performed at specific stages in the manufacturing, fabrication and installation activities to ensure that the items meet the applicable specification, code and regulatory
~
requirements "
l Contrary to the above:
The Senior Resident Inspector (Construction) has determined thVough interviews with craft labor supervision and the Comanche Peak Project Engineer for Civil / Structural' activities that no inspections of the l
i fabrication or installation of certain shims specified by Design Change Authorization 9872, dated March 30, 1981, and drawing SK-82032, revision 0,'were perfonned.
The shims specified by the Design Change Authorization. and the drawing ' referenced above form a portion of the seismic restraint system for the containment polar crane.
' This is a Severity Level IV Violation (Supplement'II.D) 4 l
Corrective Action J
The subject shims will be removed and replaced with material verified and documented by QC. This work will be accomplished in accordance with an Operation Traveler:
' O
(~
lO '
\\
.. :::::::L. L
...=:,
=== :===== u.==-
i,.
O NRC Inspection Report 82-11 f
TXX-3554 Page 3 w
Preventative Acticn i
This work was performed without QC inspection because no QC installation interface had been established procedurally. All safety-related activities performed by the Rigging Department are now accomplished with Operation Travelers.
Procedure CP-CPM 6.3 requires that the travelers The use of the be routed through QA before the' war L activities begin.
_ traveler will permit 'the establish:: nt of the necessary QC interfaces.
Comoliance Date The shims will be removed 'and reple :ed consistent with the construction schedule.
4 1
t t
e i
5 s
s.
fI e
i i-O 6
- O s
)
seeee 9
. - +
y3 y-te-t-M --
+
e
--wa=
1
-e
++
9-r v
r' e'-*-wi==r-yev*
f.
,sj
~
t 4
.that there were design problems involved with the run that he and his people were working on, and that it would be several days before they would reach a conclusion. This matter will be considered as an unresolved item until such time as the resolution of the engineering problein is. developed.
The piping run involved in this matter.is that displayed on isometric drawing BRHL AF-1-SB-003 and the supports are AF-1-058-004-S33K and AF-l-008-005-533R.
(Unresolved item 8211-01).
No violations or deviations were identified.
5.
Investigation of Allegations Pertaining to the Unit 1 Polar Crane During June 1982, the SRIC was informed that allegations had been made by a former construction worker regarding the construction and operability of the Unit 1 polar crane 1/.
The allegations were:
a.
Shims for the rail support system had been altered during installation in some unacceptable manner.
'b.
The crane rail moves during crane operation such that a large gap develops that could lead to failure.
The SRIC obtained Drawing 2323-S1-0515, " Reactor Building Liner O
Details and Crane Support Details," in order to better understand the support and restraint system. The drawing indicated that the single circular rail was supported by a series of 28 girders which were supported by a series of brackets welded into the building liner with anchorage into the building concrete. In addition, between each ' set of supports at about the mid-point of each girder, t
i there was a radial type restraint also welded into the liner and 1 anchored in the concrete. The drawing indicated that the girders should be shinned, as required, off of the support brackets to provide a substantial degree of levelness. The radial restraint brackets were also indicated to have a uniform 1/4-inch shim 4
between that portion attached to the building and the portion attached to the top of girders. The rails were shown to be attached to the girders by several-welded clips per girder. The welding was shown only.to the girder which would provide radial restraint to the rails but would also allow the rail to slip in a circumferential direction.
The SRIC learned that Chicago Bridge & Iron Company (C8&I) had been contractually responsible for the erection of the reactor building liner, including installation of the entire crane support system but excluding erection of the crane itself. The SRIC interviewed the onsite CB&I project superintendent and learned that they had installed the crane rail support system in accordance with their contract, including the referenced drawing. He stated that when his company had finished their work, there were gaps left in the 1/ The alleger, Mr. Miles, subsequently-testified at the Atomic Safety and
'I~icensing Board hearing relating to Comanche Peak on July 28, 1982, about these allegations to the NRC -relating to the polar crane.
r -'
- m::r~:~. -
.:L -
^
5 f
restraint brackets since the reactor building was locally out-of-round while the rail system has been required to be round and centered on the as-built center of the building.
He indicated that B&R had had considerable difficulty in erecting the crane because of interferences and because e
the crane wheels did not seem to fit the rails. He -
indicated that he thought that B&R had later installed additional shims in the laterial restraints and indicated that neither his company nor himself were responsible for that work.
The SRIC then obtained a design change authorization that depicted the installation of shims of a relatively special design to fill the restraint gaps based upon measurements apparently supplied by B&R field personnel to the engineer.
Drawing S.K-82032, " Polar Crane Supports - Additional Shim Requirements," had been issued by the engineer during November 1977, but was not released via Design Change Authorization 9872 until March 1981.
Noting that the design change authorization was annotated to be a safety-related document, the SRIC requested that any germaine quali.ty control documentation on file be provided to him as soon as possible. After a short period of time, the SRIC was informed that no such documentation appeared O
to have been generated. The SRIC then asked that the crane be operated in a slow manner such that it would transverse the entire. reactor building circumference at least once and that it then be placed in a de-energized condition for an 3
l inspection as soon as reasonably possible, considering that it was in nearly constant use. On or about June'22, 1982, the crane was transversed for the SRIC and was noted to operate very smoothly. Based on hearsay that the structural iron workers had probably installed the additional shims.
if indeed they were installed, the SRIC encountered the i
general foreman of this group after the crane run observa-I tion. The SRIC asked the general foreman if he could recollect.if his people installed the shims in question.
He indicated that he did remember the work and, further, that it had'been done over several weekends during May or June of 1981. When asked if he could remember whether QC had been involved he said he was not really sure but did not think so.
j A short time later, the licensee'} ~M1 : tructural engineer visited the SRIC and stated that d; Wr;,, which had the responsibility, had failed to issue an " Operational Traveler"
.that would have provided the interface between QA/QC and the
~ craft labor force to have had the fabrication and installation i
of the shims inspected. At this point the SRIC detennined that a violation 'of Appendix B had. occurred regardless of exact status of the shims themselves. The licensee subsequently disabled the crane and inspected several of the radial restraints and found that:indeed some of the shims
(
hi;d been altered to a condition other than that contemplated I
by the designer.
.. ?
..-.?.:.'T L' -
- = T - :
~
' gr.'.
~
6 A
\\~-)
Regarding the matter of the operability of the crane because of rail gaps, the SRIC has previously indicated that the crane The ran very smoothly during a denonstration run in June 1982.
SRIC ascertained that additional rail clips of a forged type designed to hold heavy railroad rail were installed via Design Change Authorization 6437 and that these clips shoula have the The SRIC effect of preventing circumferential rail movement.
was also informed by the licensee that the basic cause of the earlier rail movement was an inadequate design by the crane manufacturer in that he had failed to provide a tangential offset within the crane trucks that caused the wheels of a given truck The to bind on the curved rail and thus drag the rail around.
licensee has stated that this design error has been corrected which is apparent from the way the crane now operates.
For the record, the SRIC would note that the polar crane is classified in the licensee's FSAR as seismic Category II with During normal power operation of no nuclear safety aspects.
the facility, the crane is parked and in a de-energized condition.
Its primary use, during refueling operations, is to lift the Seismic Category II is defined in the FSAR reactor vessel head.
Section 3.2 as those components or systems whose continued function (during or after a seismic event) is not required, but whose failure could damage another component such that it could In effect, the crane must only
(~)/
not satisfy its safety function.
stay in place during a seismic event and thus not damage another s,
component.
The SRIC accompanied a Region IV investigator during an interview of the former construction worker who made the actual The interview was conducted several days after allegation.
conclusion of the SRIC's investigation.
The alleger provided more details about his allegation than was originally given to the NRC but without adding any information that changed the results or conclusions of the investigation. The alleger made an appearance before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board in the matter of TUGC0 during the hearing phase that took place from Neither the alleger's prefiled testimony nor July 26-29, 1982.
his statements during the hearing revealed a need for any change in the invest 1gative findings.
l
~
n U
I
-e---
y